Abortion doctors would lose medical licenses under new Oklahoma bill

a reply to: Annee

Oh annee c'mon the fetus sexual organs are developed in utero . So you are telling me that somehow aside from this the desire is formed before birth ... And yet we can abort the baby because the fetus is not really a baby. That is some of the worst propaganda I've ever seen. By the way the jury's not out on children being better off with gender reassignment.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: Annee

Oh annee c'mon the fetus sexual organs are developed in utero . So you are telling me that somehow aside from this the desire is formed before birth ... And yet we can abort the baby because the fetus is not really a baby. That is some of the worst propaganda I've ever seen

Like I said - - you choose ignorance.

The brain tells a person who they are attracted to and what gender they are. Not the packaging.

Science knows this. They don't know fully how yet, because its extremely complex.

But, it was only a few years ago they discovered a gene for left-handedness.

The research, which involved over 40 scientists from 20 research centres around the world, revealed a gene called LRRTM1; the first to be discovered which has an effect on handedness. Although little is known about LRRTM1, the Oxford team suspects that it modifies the development of asymmetry in the human brain. Asymmetry is an important feature of the human brain, with the left side usually controlling speech and language, and the right side controlling emotion. In left-handers this pattern is often reversed. There is also evidence that asymmetry of the brain was an important feature during human evolution; the brains of our closest relatives, the apes, are more symmetrical than humans’ and they do not show a strong handedness. - See more at: www.anythinglefthanded.co.uk...

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

An acorn has the "bits" inside it to become a tree - helped along with water, soil and sun. But the acorn itself is not a tree - it has the potential to become a fully formed tree. If the acorn is dug up before the tree is formed, you didn't cut down a tree - you prevented a tree from forming.

Same with a fetus.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
By the way the jury's not out on children being better off with gender reassignment.

I've seen the links and sites you use for information.

They're all right wing and mostly Christian.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

An acorn has the "bits" inside it to become a tree - helped along with water, soil and sun. But the acorn itself is not a tree - it has the potential to become a fully formed tree. If the acorn is dug up before the tree is formed, you didn't cut down a tree - you prevented a tree from forming.

Same with a fetus.

I like that one.

Keep it in the vault for easy referral.

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

"d forbid) I found out tomorrow that Scout (my fetus) was lacking essential organs and would not survive much past birth...I'm supposed to suffer through the next 2 months...$40 per week for a chiropractor, $40 per month for my psychiatrist, not being able to clean my house properly because it hurts to move and bend over, not picking up my 2 year old because it hurt".

Oh my it's all about you then. What happened to all the "rights of the child "? Hillary and the UN would be do unhappy the rights of the child...,,oh wait the unborn have no rights I forgot, even the unborn transgendered ones.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
What happened to all the "rights of the child "?

A fetus is not a child.

Just like an acorn is not a tree.

Thanks Kaylaluv

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie first I
I don't give a rats patoot if you were a cop and is that supposed to intimidate me and /or make your judgement superior? From a Leo point of view if someone comes into my home and rifles through my stuff but I don't know about it does that make it ok? But I do get that you don't care and feel that no one else should and that the State should mandate it but not mandate licences for abortion doctors. I was really pointing out the hypocrisy of people yelling about child rights in transgenderism but do not advocate the rights of many millions of aborted children and now people are trying to tell me that even though the unborn have no rights still their gender is formed before birth but that they should be afforded the right by the state to make a Choice that was already made bfore birth. This is what's illogical about progressive values.

The only reason I brought up my prior employment was because I was the one people called if there was an issue...such as a transgendered person in a restroom harassing or assaulting people. And in my personal life AND my professional life it never happened. The ONE time I got a complaint like that was a hetero male wearing hetero clothing being a perv. The 'issue' is such a non-issue it's ridiculous.

The pro-choice crowd is all about supporting the autonomous bodily rights of the WOMAN. The fully formed, post birth woman. The woman that has to live with the consequences of the abortion or the consequences of the pregnancy/birth. Until actual birth a fetus is a fetus...not a child. As long as the fetus is dependent on the WOMAN it is HER choice whether or not it should stay there.

Once a child is born it is then a full fledged human being and deserves the rights as such. Which would include not being harassed/assaulted/bullied/ostracized for things such as their sexual orientation.

Nothing illogical about progressive values. Makes total sense to me. What doesn't make sense is protecting a fetus at the expense of the incubator...oops, sorry, woman...and then treating the child like dog sh*t once its born because it doesn't confirm to Christian values. Despite the fact that Jesus Christ himself was all about peace, love and uplifting one's brother and NOT to pass judgement on others.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

"d forbid) I found out tomorrow that Scout (my fetus) was lacking essential organs and would not survive much past birth...I'm supposed to suffer through the next 2 months...$40 per week for a chiropractor, $40 per month for my psychiatrist, not being able to clean my house properly because it hurts to move and bend over, not picking up my 2 year old because it hurt".

Oh my it's all about you then. What happened to all the "rights of the child "? Hillary and the UN would be do unhappy the rights of the child...,,oh wait the unborn have no rights I forgot, even the unborn transgendered ones.

Yes. It is all about me. Especially since, in my hypothetical example, the fetus is non-viable. Why should I put myself through so much physical and financial strain over a 'child' that has no chance at living outside my body? Why should I sacrifice my other 2 living, breathing children...by being on bed rest, by not being able to properly care for them, for all the recovery time I would have to suffer through...for a 'child' that has no chance of living outside my body? Forcing me to carry to term wouldn't save anyone, it would just make my life more miserable than it needs to be.

And even if the fetus wasn't defective, but I knew that I couldn't handle the physical or financial strain of the situation. Or if I knew that I had an abusive partner and would be trapped and me and the child would be abused. Or whatever my reasons are....it would be MY life, and they would be MY reasons and I would be the one living with the consequences of my decision. Not you. You worry about yours and I'll worry about mine. Let me make decisions based on the circumstances that I'm dealing with, not by some religious paradigm that's been hammered into you.

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie yes I know about the rights of the woman and I'm
Saying the unborn have rights or should have rights at least as much as transgendered people. Well when the life of the mom is involved that's biomedical ethics.....personally I feel that's different than just convenience.
Abusive partner not an excuse for ending life of child.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie yes I know about the rights of the woman and I'm
Saying the unborn have rights or should have rights at least as much as transgendered people.

Do transgender people have less rights than women?

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

Why should I sacrifice my other 2 living, breathing children...by being on bed rest, by not being able to properly care for them, for all the recovery time I would have to suffer through

so, it wasn't all about you after all, was it??

and well, then there's your husband, isn't there, who I imagine would be the one working his arse off trying to pay for all the medical expense.
I often heard that the mother is the axis of the wheel...if she breaks, the whole wheel breaks. but the family values people just want to break the wheel, as long as it prevents women from haveing abortions, even nonviable fetuses should be saved!

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus
But when you say 'all fetuses must be given the chance at life' without regard to specific circumstances, then you are completely trashing the rights of the woman.

As in my personal example: a Pap smear could potentially put me into an excruciating PTSD episode. But somewhere someone made the rule that all OBGYN's have to do a Pap smear on a pregnant woman. So now, here I am saying "I really don't want you sticking this:

into my vagina, and I have a valid reason why you shouldn't." And instead of even considering my point I've had 2 doctors REFUSE PRENATAL TREATMENT ALTOGETHER. And I'm having to jump through hoops to have a 3rd doctor even consider letting me skip it.

My rights as an individual, regarding what happens to MY body has been completely trashed based on someone else's opinion. Someone else who I have never met, nor will I ever meet. Someone else who clearly did not even consider a circumstance such as mine. And let me tell you it f*cking sucks. It has been the source of much stress and heartache that these 'professionals' won't even take 5 minutes to listen to my concerns. And it's not really their fault, it's all about protocol and regulations.

Once that fetus is born it DOES have all the rights a transgendered person- or any other person- should.

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie
I'm truly very sorry about the prenatal issues you are having. I believe prenatal is premium.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I really appreciate that. And I respect your views and understand that you feel stopping abortion would be stopping murder. But the bottom line is: this is MY body and I should be the one to decide what goes into it and what comes out of it. The end. Definitely not some politician or other form of rule/regulation maker.

* And the good news is, even though I've been abandoned by all these doctors, I've been taking good care of myself and Scout. And as far as I can tell she's healthy and should make it to full term fat and happy!

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

A bit off topic, but do you have access to widwife services where you are?

originally posted by: Phage
Can you provide a single example of another form of felonious "misconduct" which is any manner similar?

Felonious? Nah, because I'm not in the mood to pick through the documentation to which I linked in order to just appease your attempt at making a point.

However, drinking alcohol is legal. Getting drunk is legal in many instances. However, you can absolutely lose your medical license under "misconduct" if you show up at your practice drunk on legal alcohol. I'd be willing to bet that it may fall under a felony, too, if, say, said misconduct resulted in the death of a human being.

How does an abortion protect the life of a fetus? You are not making any sense.

Because I misspoke there...I'm responding to a lot of people at once. I'm entitled to a little mistake here and there...kind of like people who think that just because a SCOTUS ruling says that something is legal doesn't mean that it can't be regulated and controlled at the state level. Or like saying that a law that only affects licensed medical doctors will be used to prosecute women who take the morning after pill.

But in any event, we both know that this will be challenged in court if signed into law, so we'll just wait and see.

originally posted by: Annee
I don't care what the scientific community says.

The scientific community is not required to spend 18 years taking care of a child by force.

I hope that you never use the tired argument that conservatives ignore science when creating (insert legislation here).

And for the record, mothers who give birth don't HAVE TO spend 18 years taking care of a child by force, but if we want to resort to strawman arguments, I guess you got the first go...

originally posted by: Annee
I think all males should have a vasectomy at birth.

Then only reverse the operation when they've chosen to have a child.

Ah...and I'M THE ONE that has issues with individual rights...got it.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: Annee
I don't care what the scientific community says.

The scientific community is not required to spend 18 years taking care of a child by force.

I hope that you never use the tired argument that conservatives ignore science when creating (insert legislation here).

Right Wing Fundies. Are there any real conservatives anymore?

And for the record, mothers who give birth don't HAVE TO spend 18 years taking care of a child by force, . . .

"Potluck" adoptive parents instead? Or orphanage, or foster home?

I could NEVER give my LIVING CHILD away. (a fetus is not a child)

originally posted by: dawnstar
this appears to be the last version: (snipped)

no preservation of health, although there have been cases where pregnancy has cause blindness or liver damage, and probably other problems. and no exception for if a miscarriage of an non-viable fetus last for days and the lady is in extreme pain because of it.

Well, I don't know...like I said, that state's site concerning it's bills progression is a bit onerous to figure out decisively. YOu could be right, although I don't think so...but maybe. Why can't it just have a link titled "as approved and sent to the governor's desk?"

but ya know what? I am convinced that some of yas aren't gonna listen to reason unless it's someone who you care about deeply that is laying in the hospital screaming in pain and begging that something be done to end that pain. as it is, my sons have not married, so I have no daughter-in-laws to worry about and well, my siblings are older than I am..and we are all past the age. so, what should I care...

Ah, yes, that old tired tactic of just resorting to ad hominem attacks in order to invalidate my side of the argument--one of my favorite logical fallacies (and you talk about listening to reason...LOL).

But I wouldn't expect you to understand that I have a sister who has had an elective abortion, as a teenager. I won't go into details, but she has discussed her guilt and sadness over that decision many times over with me. So just understand that I HAVE had abortion affect one of my family members, as well as a few other women (an men) that I know (yes, men are affected by it, too, especially when their wife does it without their knowledge). To assume otherwise about me (and some of us who you ignorantly say don't "listen to reason") is simply ignorant. You don't know the history of anyone who holds a stance on abortion, regardless of what opinion they hold.

And for the record, I'm FOR abortions when there are medical complications that can affect the life of the mother. But, I'm "vasectomized" now and can't impregnate my wife anymore, so, what should I care...

Sorry, apathy isn't my strong suit.